By John Q. Hosedrinker 
President Donald Trump and Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. have continued to assert mathematically inaccurate claims regarding percentage reductions in prescription drug prices. Trump has stated his policies could reduce prices by as much as 600 percent, a figure Kennedy attempted to justify by comparing a price drop from $600 to $100 as a 600 percent saving. This assertion, however, is mathematically impossible, as a reduction cannot exceed 100 percent of an item’s original value.
Read the original article here
It’s quite striking to see prominent political figures, Donald Trump and Robert F. Kennedy Jr., doubling down on what can only be described as mathematically impossible claims, particularly concerning percentages. It’s not a matter of complex calculus or advanced statistics; these are fundamental concepts that most people grasp by the time they reach middle school. Yet, we’re hearing pronouncements that defy basic arithmetic, suggesting a profound misunderstanding or perhaps a deliberate manipulation of numbers.
The idea that a 600% decrease in price is possible, or that an increase from $100 to $600 represents a 600% rise, is fundamentally flawed. When something goes from $100 to $600, that’s a $500 increase. To express this as a percentage of the original price ($100), you divide the increase ($500) by the original price ($100) and multiply by 100, resulting in a 500% increase. Similarly, a drop from $600 to $100 represents a $500 decrease. Expressed as a percentage of the original $600, this is a decrease of approximately 83.33%. There’s no interpretation of standard mathematics that allows for these figures as presented.
These aren’t just minor gaffes; they represent a pattern of disregarding established mathematical principles. It’s akin to saying that 2 + 2 equals 5, not because of a different system of logic, but because the speaker insists it must be so. The comments, especially those relating to drug prices, suggest a misunderstanding of how percentages work in real-world business and economic contexts. For instance, the concept of profit margins and markups, central to any business understanding, seems to be eluding these figures when they talk about cost reductions and savings.
The persistence in defending these incorrect calculations is perhaps the most concerning aspect. Instead of acknowledging a mistake and correcting it, there’s a doubling down, a reinforcement of demonstrably false mathematical statements. This echoes cautionary tales from literature, like George Orwell’s *1984*, where the ruling party attempts to control reality by dictating that truth is whatever they say it is, even if it contradicts observable facts and logic. It raises questions about the integrity of information and the willingness to accept objective reality.
When public figures with significant influence present such distorted views of mathematics, it can have a ripple effect. It normalizes the idea that facts are malleable and can be bent to suit a narrative. This is particularly worrying when these claims are made in contexts that impact public policy, such as discussions around healthcare costs. If the foundational understanding of economic principles is so flawed, how can sound policy decisions be made?
The repeated instances of these “impossible mathematics” claims, whether from Trump in the past regarding egg prices or now concerning drug prices, and similarly from Kennedy Jr., suggest a deeper issue than just a simple error. It points towards a disregard for accuracy and a willingness to present information that is factually incorrect, possibly to appeal to a base that may not scrutinize these details or to push a specific agenda without being hindered by factual constraints.
It’s a disservice to the public when individuals in positions of influence operate with such a fundamental lack of understanding of basic quantitative reasoning. Math, by its very nature, is not open to interpretation or “alternative” methods of calculation when it comes to establishing objective truths. The implications of dismissing established mathematical principles extend beyond mere numerical errors; they erode trust in data, expertise, and the very foundation of logical discourse. The continued adherence to these mathematically unsound claims by both Trump and Kennedy Jr. suggests a troubling disconnect from reality and a potentially dangerous approach to public communication.